4/15/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly THIRD DIVISION [ G.R. No. 208845, February 03, 2020 ] ALLAN MAÑAS, JOINED BY WIFE LENA ISABELLE Y. MAÑAS, PETITIONERS, VS. ROSALINA ROCA NICOLASORA, JANET NICOLASORA SALVA, ANTHONY NICOLASORA, AND MA. THERESE ROSELLE UY-CUA, RESPONDENTS. DECISION LEONEN, J.: Dizon v. Court of Appeals[1] instructs us that a lease contract's implied renewal does not mean that all the terms in the original contract are deemed revived. Only the terms that affect the lessee's continued use and enjoyment of the property would be considered part of the implied renewal. Indeed, the right of first refusal has nothing to do with the use and enjoyment of property.[2] Before this Court is a Petition for Review on Certiorari[3] filed by Spouses Allan and Lena Isabelle Y. Mañas (the Mañas Spouses). They assail the Court of Appeals Decision[4] that affirmed the Regional Trial Court's dismissal of their Complaint for Rescission of Contract of Sale and Cancellation of the Certificates of Title and Enforcement of the Right of First Refusal.[5] On April 18, 2005, the Mañas Spouses entered into a Lease Contract with Rosalina Roca Nicolasora (Rosalina) over a property in Tacloban City that was owned by Rosalina's husband, Chy Tong Sy Yu (now deceased).[6] The Lease Contract partly stated: WHEREAS, the LESSEE is also interested in buying the same real property, during the existence of the lease or thereafter, upon notice, from the LESSOR under mutually acceptable terms and conditions; WHEREOF, premises considered, the parties hereto have covenanted and agreed on the following: 1. That the duration of this Agreement is for one (1) year from the date of execution hereof, unless sooner revoked or cancelled by either party upon serious violation of any of the terms and conditions hereof; Provided, that this lease may be renewed for like period at the option of the LESSEE; https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/66171 1/14

Select target paragraph3